tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post4545455183335531855..comments2018-02-15T13:21:57.679-08:00Comments on EGO OUT: MAR 18, 2017 LENR INFO AND MORE ABOUT POPULISMPeter Gluckhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13062072576736234450noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-326167780677397310.post-39352908884474652602017-03-19T04:49:02.595-07:002017-03-19T04:49:02.595-07:00Peter - I would not call 103.8°C superheated steam...Peter - I would not call 103.8°C superheated steam, since at even a slight pressure above atmospheric it will be water. Given the vapour pressure at around 65°C, we also have a maximum pressure-differential along the whole pipe from generation to condensation of maybe 75-80kPa. See http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/water-vapor-saturation-pressure-d_599.html . As you say, you do need a big steam-pipe in order to comply with this. <br /><br />I have no data as to the accuracy of the temperature or pressure measurements. They are however too close to normal boiling-point and atmospheric pressure to be taken as an indication that the steam was water-free or indeed that it wasn&#39;t simply hot water under a slight overpressure. <br /><br />I hope that some reliable data turns up about the size of the steam pipe, so that you can lay this to rest. If it turns out to be D40, after all, then the figures we are given for the measurements cannot be correct. The constancy of the written values certainly implies that they are unreal, given that the building was not at a constant temperature day and night for the whole year.Simon Derricutthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137826634256652580noreply@blogger.com